About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
.s. consulate in benghazi and said if you nominate susan rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> well, first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. a
. >> that leads us now to susan rice, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations who went on national television and said this attack in benghazi, libya, was probably because of this anti-muslim film. >> reporter: exactly. >> she had talking points, right? where did those talking points come from? did they come from petraeus and the cia, were they edited later by the white house, do we know? >> reporter: we don't know. you heard peter king was asked that specific question. according to him and some others, we still don't know exactly where the disconnect was, if you will, between what the intelligence community now says that they believed at the time and the talking points that ended up with susan rice that ended up on television that sunday afterwards. it still doesn't seem to be very clear. the reason why he is now the former cia director is because of the affair that david petraeus had. he resigned one week ago. the question is whether or not that would come up at all. he said it was addressed at the beginning and he regretted what happened and that they didn't really address it at all after
that ambassador susan rice used. >> let me interrupt you for just a moment. john mccain is just emerged from the senate intelligence committee meeting. let's listen to what he has to say. >> ability to make judgments about what is clearly a failure of intelligence, and described the actions and that of his agency and interaction with other agencies and i appreciate his service and his candor. >> senator, senator. >> so as the senator walks away from the reporters who are amassed, he is with the armed services committee, so unlikely that he is has been able to be privy to the closed door meeting of the senate intelligence committee. i don't know, dana, can you shed light on that? i didn't get to hear what he said unfortunately. >> yes. he actually has been in the intelligence committee meetings, you're right. he is not a member officially of the intelligence committee any more and used to be and so there are privileges for people like him with his kind of seniority. they get to sit in on these intelligence meetings and he has been going to most if not all of these important meetings and inclu
controversial coming out of these briefings, whether or not susan rice, the u.n. ambassador -- the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., had the proper information or was correct in what she said publicly about the attack being probably at that point four days after the attack because of a demonstration. democrats are really to a person coming to her defense aggressively and trying to explain why there was a discrepancy. listen to kent conrad of the democratic member of the senate health care community. >> what is very clear is that ambassador rice used the talking points that the intelligence committee had all signed off on. that is very, very clear. she used the unclassified talking points that were signed off on by the entire intelligence community, so criticisms of her are completely unwarranted. that is very clear. >> and susan, dianne feinstein, just moments ago actually took out and read the unclassified talking points that susan rice used on that day, and they were very short. it sounds like there were two, maybe three points in the talking points, and it was almost certain to change.
's assessment, susan rice's assessment or your own assessment? >> i think what we first learned in the few hours and days immediately after the attack to today, the intelligence has evolved. certainly there was taking time to gather the information, to analyze it and put forward an assessment. what we do know is that when director petraeus came before us on the 14th, the information that he gave us was not the information that was put out by ambassador rice or by the administration. so it begs the question why wasn't a more complete picture given to the american public more quickly than it was? >> okay. you said that the intelligence has evolved, which means just from a layman's term, you would think that as they gathered information, they learned more than things would change. just from people sitting at home and not for partisans or for people who are on capitol hill, are you actually talk ing to each other about -- getting to the bottom of this or is everyone just talking at each other because i would imagine no administration wants anyone to die on their watch. >> certainly we are talking to
.n. susan rice going to be secretary of state, that could be a very ugly confirmation hearing. and senator john kerry talked about as defense secretary, wolf? >> yeah, there's been reports that john kerry, who i always assumed wanted to be secretary of state could be the next secretary of defense leon panetta has made it clear he's ready to move on and go back to california after all these years in washington, former cia director, now the secretary of defense. i don't know how long that will last. but if kerry is nominated to be the secretary of defense, that does leave hillary clinton's job at the state department open. and susan rice was always -- at least i always believed she was the front-runner until those controversial comments she made about the benghazi killing of the u.s. ambassador and three other americans on those five sunday talk shows. and the republicans really have been going after her. and if the president stands firm and nominates her to be the next secretary of state, it will be a bruising confirmation hearing, there's no doubt about that. my p sense is, he probably wan
that there is support for secretary rice that is susan rice, the u.n. ambassador for the united states, for taking the position had she leaves of hillary clinton as secretary of state. and that name, susan rice, has been bandied about for quite a long time, but now, you know, the drumbeat is increasing and secretary clinton, remember, has said she will leave at the end of the term, that would mean january, but she's also indicated that she might stick around until the president is able to replace her and that would mean, of course, that the president would have to nominate someone and that person would a have to get through the senate. that's where the plot thickens because susan rice, as we all know, is part of this unfolding saga about benghazi and the attack that killed the u.s. ambassador and other americans in libya. so she has been blamed a lot, of course, for coming out and saying that those attacks, that attack was spurred by a video and then later on the administration said that it was terrorism. that could set her up for some really tough times in hearings up on capitol hill, in front of
on september 14th was general petraeus saying it was not a terrorist attack. why did susan rice carry that out. the president can't have it both ways. >> hmm. well, the bitter back and forth continues. the house intelligence committee is holding a closed door hearing on the attack that killed u.s. ambassador chris stevens and three other americans. more on the fallout from the libya attack. want to bring in dana bash, and, dana, you have been watching, staking outle intelligence committee hearing. there is reports i guess that there might be a videotape or something. do we know that there is a tape, surveillance tape, that exists of the attack? do we know that? >> well, this comes from our national security correspondent, suzanne, kelly who is reporting that what is going on behind those closed doors. it'seen going, on this t intelligence officials brought with them closed-circumstance yult video which from the compound that was recovered from the compound that, of course, was attacked in benghazi, and they're playing it for these lawmakers and the point, according to suzanne's sources, is to
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)